Yeah I have gotten them a week ago. They are warm sounding with some midrange sparkle. I prefer the DX1000 to the Kenwoods though so I am selling them. The Kenwoods are more neutral but the JVCs are more fun sounding with their bottom end. However, the JVCs are slightly darker sounding but not to the Senneheiser extreme.

Bass wise, how does the D2000 fair against the K1000's? I read your review/impressions; I'm curious.

How's the bass quality, quantity, speed and detail, comparing the two headphones?

-Nick

That is an easy question with a short answer: The Kenwood beat the D2000 bass in all departments. Easily, hands down. If you like dub with lots of bass: go Kenwood, they can't be beat. But accoustic bass also sounds really good. More body to it than the D2000.

That is an easy question with a short answer: The Kenwood beat the D2000 bass in all departments. Easily, hands down. If you like dub with lots of bass: go Kenwood, they can't be beat. But accoustic bass also sounds really good. More body to it than the D2000.

Easily, huh? I believe the D2000's bass is damn near perfect, IMO. And I listen to classic rock and jazz, through a SS amp.

Which of the two (it and the DT990) have more bass slam, extension (go deeper), quantity (midbass), speed/fast transient response (bass, mid, highs specially for very fast music)?
How much is it forward compared with the AD2000s, in %??.UPDATE: (you say in a previous page that it is more forward, but now you said that it is neutral...???)

The headstage* in this headphone is very big?, how big is it, compared to the DT990s?
*it is bigger than your DX1000?
*see, i don't refer to soundstage but to "out of the head stage"

UPDATE2: Which is darker?. the Denons of the kenwoods and the same but with the DX1000 vs it?
Thank you very much for your answers

The Kenwood beat the DT990 by a long shot imo. The only department the DT990 may be called better than the Kenwoods is "airy highs". I don't like (too) airy and I don't like the tinny highs of the DT990, but that is a matter of taste probably.
I am not familiar with "head stage" or "out of the head stage".
I do think the DX1000 sound more spacious (but the DX1000 are extreme, the Kenwood are by no means inadequate).

Why you don't make this thread private then? (with the help of a moderator or if you have the enough privileges (that i don't known much about...)...), if you don't want to help to "ordinary" see ("") user as me....Ah, i known. your EGO is very big that it prevent you to help a head-fier as me for example.
....What lack of education/politeness is yours

I am sorry it took me so long to answer your questions.
I was because you are on my ignore list, caused by similar posts as the above.

When i refer to headstage, i refer to the space and sounds that you perceive out of your head (as when you listen to speakers a few feet/meters away) and in all the angles.
Well, which is faster of the two then?. I need a headphone for music (specially that, that i like most).
I want at least the same PRAT/emotion that i got with my ex speakers [i had some decent Altec Lansing vs3151 (not audiophile quality, but A LOT of FUN and PRAT)] but with headphones; with a decent sized (well, medium sized or better) soundstage and headstage at least, and if it's closed is better.
Why the Kenwoods beat the DT990 for a long margin?. Can you give me a explanation please (What areas?)?. This headphones seem very interesting and possibly better than the Denons, and seem very well constructed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kees

The Kenwood beat the DT990 by a long shot imo. The only department the DT990 may be called better than the Kenwoods is "airy highs". I don't like (too) airy and I don't like the tinny highs of the DT990, but that is a matter of taste probably.
I am not familiar with "head stage" or "out of the head stage".
I do think the DX1000 sound more spacious (but the DX1000 are extreme, the Kenwood are by no means inadequate).